View Cart

Gay Marriage, Speaking the Truth in Love, and the United States Supreme Court

Truth in Love 1

Dr. Heath Lambert discusses the Obergefell vs. Hodges Supreme Court case.

Jun 8, 2015

Heath Lambert: One of the most significant problems that the Christian church is addressing in the contemporary culture is the one of homosexuality, same-sex attraction, and the issue of gay marriage. Even now, the Supreme Court of the United States is poised to rule on whether marriage can be understood as the union between members of the same sex. Most Christians know that the significant decision is being made, but I think many are unfamiliar with the crucial details of the case.

The case that the Supreme Court is deciding is Obergefell versus Hodges. At the heart of this case are two homosexual men named James Obergefell and John Arthur. The couple began a dating relationship in 1993 and have been together, but never decided to marry since then. They remained together until 2011, when Arthur was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or Lou Gehrig’s Disease. It’s a terminal illness that destroys motor functioning and ultimately took John Arthur’s life in 2013.

Before his death, when faced with the sobering reality of this terminal diagnosis, the couple decided to marry after the Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act and the 2013 Griswold versus Connecticut decision. The couple lived in Ohio, and because gay marriage remained illegal in that state, the couple needed to marry in another state where it was permitted. But this was challenging because Lou Gehrig’s Disease had confined John Arthur to a hospital bed. The couple began to raise support and were able to charter a medical jet and fly to a state where same-sex unions were permitted. And so, on July 11, 2013, Obergefell and Arthur boarded a plane to Maryland with Arthur’s aunt, Paulette Roberts, who’d been ordained to officiate weddings over the Internet.

After the plane landed, they were on the ground for less than an hour, just enough time to complete the ceremony on board the plane, and depart from the airport for the return trip to Ohio. Upon returning to his home state, Mr. Obergefell wanted to be listed as the surviving spouse on Arthur’s death certificate once he passed away. But since Ohio does not allow same-sex marriage, this action was not legal, and so eight days after their marriage ceremony, Mr. Obergefell filed a lawsuit demanding that his marriage to Arthur, which was legally performed in Maryland, be recognized by the state of Ohio. More than a year later, in November of 2014, after Mr. Arthur had passed away, the US court of appeals for the sixth circuit upheld the Ohio ban on gay marriage as well as in three other states: Michigan, Kentucky, and Tennessee.

This placed the decision of the sixth circuit at odds with other federal courts. And so, the Supreme Court is now deciding the case to sort out the confusion among the lower courts. The case Obergefell versus Hodges is named after James Obergefell suing for legal recognition of his marriage on the death certificate and Richard Hodges, the director of the Ohio Department of Health, who issues those certificates. It is a consolidation of several other cases, but the Supreme Court is referring to all the cases as Obergefell versus Hodges because that case was filed first.

And now America waits to see what the Supreme Court will decide. Specifically, the court is adjudicating whether the Constitution requires a state to recognize a same-sex marriage that was legally performed in another state. Effectively, they are deciding whether marriage can be legitimately understood as the union between members of the same sex nationwide.

As we await this decision, I think Christians must confess that there is a very real sense in which this decision is tremendously significant and another very real sense in which the decision is not significant. Let me talk about the significance first. There’s two reasons to see the significance of this decision.

First, many expect the Supreme Court to rule in favor of Mr. Obergefell and require an embrace of same-sex marriage nationwide. If that happens, marriage in the United States would be redefined to something other than it has been in the entire history of our nation. Indeed, it would be redefined to something different than it’s been in the entire history of the world.

Another reason it’s significant is because, if that redefinition does happen, as many expect, it would happen by the action of nine people on the Supreme Court. Now, those nine people are expected, according to many commentators, to be split with the deciding vote being cast by Anthony Kennedy. If that conjecture is true, then it presents another very sobering reality for us to consider. Marriage is one of the most significant institutions in the history of God’s world. In our lifetime, if the speculation is correct, the government of the United States of America could see that institution of marriage redefined by the decision of a single man. That is a reality of tremendous consequence.

But as important as it is, we also need to assert that there is another way in which this decision is not so significant. And it’s this: the Supreme Court cannot redefine marriage. As important as the Supreme Court is, as significant as a decision would be, marriage is God’s institution and the Supreme Court has no authority. They have no power to redefine it according to the dictates of modern culture.

Another way that the decision of the Supreme Court is not so significant is because the reality is that gay marriage is here to stay. Gay marriage is going to be with us regardless of what the Supreme Court decides on the matter. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Mr. Obergefell, gay marriage is here to stay. If the Supreme Court rejects Mr. Obergefell official claim and upholds the Ohio ban, gay marriage is here to stay. That is true because gay marriage is legal in one way or another in 37 states. That simply means that Christians are going to have to be dealing with this issue for a long time. And so, the Christian responsibility to respond to this problem will remain unchanged regardless of what the Supreme Court decides.

That’s why we’re dealing with this issue on the very first edition of this podcast and before the Supreme Court releases its decision. Regardless of what the Supreme Court decides, Christians must speak the truth and we must do it in love. That language forms the title of our podcast and is found in Ephesians 4:15 where it says, “Speaking truth in love, we’re to grow up in every way into Him who is the head, into Christ.” Notice four things about that passage.

First, Christians must speak. Christians are not given the option of silence in the midst of cultural confusion and chaos about gay marriage.

Second, Christians must speak the truth. Christians are not given the option to agree with the contemporary falsehood that gay marriage is a good thing or that gay marriage is even possible.

Third, Christians are to speak the truth and to do it in love. We are not given the option to be unkind and ungracious in our opposition to this cultural phenomenon. We must be personally gracious, admitting our own sin, our own sexual sin, our own responsibility in many ways in minimizing the institution of marriage. We must be personally helpful, drawing near to our homosexual friends who need help, and we must grow in our ability to actually know how to help them.

Fourth, Christ speaking truth in love, we grow up into Christ. We’re supposed to use our words not just to speak the truth, and not even just to be kind, but ultimately, in order to be truthful and loving, our words must point to Christ.

The reality is that an embrace of gay marriage undermines the Gospel of Jesus Christ in two ways. First, marriage, we’re told in Ephesians 5, is a picture of Christ and the church. God made the institution of marriage, formed by one man and one woman, to point to the uniquely loving relationship that exists between Christ and His church. When you distort the definition of marriage, you distort the picture of the Gospel that it’s intended to paint.

The second way is that it takes away the necessary call to repentance that is part and parcel of the Gospel. If we redefine what sin is, if we say homosexuality is not sinful, then we remove an essential element of the biblical call to repentance of sin. The Supreme Court cannot atone for sin with a redefinition of marriage. Only Jesus Christ can pay for our sins through His blood on the cross. Christians will most effectively speak the truth in love, pointing people to Christ, when they call everyone to repentant faith in Jesus, not when we acquiesce and stop talking about sin.

Even, and especially, on this issue of tremendous cultural significance, we must speak the truth in love, pointing to Christ, and we won’t just do it on the issue of homosexuality, but on every issue that Christians face. I’m looking forward to growing together in our ability to do this on future editions of this podcast. And I hope you’ll join us.